KEY CONCEPTS IN PUBLIC ARCHAEOLOGY Edited by Gabriel Moshenska Key Concepts in Public Archaeology Key Concepts in Public Archaeology Edited by Gabriel Moshenska First published in 2017 by UCL Press University College London Gower Street London WC1E 6BT Available to download free: www.ucl.ac.uk/ucl-press Text © Contributors, 2017 Images © Contributors and copyright holders named in captions, 2017 A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from The British Library. This book is published under a Creative Commons 4.0 International license (CC BY 4.0). This license allows you to share, copy, distribute and transmit the work; to adapt the work and to make commercial use of the work providing attribution is made to the authors (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work). Attribution should include the following information: Gabriel Moshenska (ed.), Key Concepts in Public Archaeology . London, UCL Press, 2017. https://doi.org/10.14324/111.9781911576419 Further details about Creative Commons licenses are available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ ISBN: 978–1–911576–44–0 (Hbk.) ISBN: 978–1–911576–43–3 (Pbk.) ISBN: 978–1–911576–41–9 (PDF) ISBN: 978–1–911576–40–2 (epub) ISBN: 978–1–911576–42–6 (mobi) ISBN: 978–1–787350–78–6 (html) ISBN: 978–1–911307–71–6 (Apple app) ISBN: 978–1–911307–72–3 (Android app) DOI: https://doi.org/10.14324/111. 9781911576419 This publication was made possible by funding from Jisc as part of the ‘Institution as e-textbook publisher’ project: https://www.jisc.ac.uk/rd/projects/institution-as-e-textbook-publisher. This book is dedicated to Tim Schadla-Hall who has led the teaching and study of public archaeology at UCL for two decades, and inspired and supported a generation of public archaeologists. vii Acknowledgements This book has been a long time in the making, and I must first express my thanks to everybody involved for their formidable patience. The collection of papers originates in the MA Public Archaeology at UCL, devised and taught over many years by Tim Schadla-Hall and others. Most of the contributors to this volume have taught on the MA course and several are graduates, while others carried out doctoral research within what is becoming known as the ‘London school’ of public archae- ology. This is the appropriate place to acknowledge the leadership and vision of the late Peter Ucko, whose understanding of archaeology as a politically engaged practice entangled in everyday life gave rise to the teaching programme in public archaeology at UCL Institute of Archaeology at both undergraduate and graduate level, as well as the creation of the journal Public Archaeology , still hosted in that depart- ment. The Ucko tradition of public archaeology as both scholarship and practice has been maintained over the last two decades by Tim Schadla- Hall, Neal Ascherson, Nick Merriman, Ulrike Sommer, Andrew Reid and many others in the Institute of Archaeology, and continues to this day. The publication of this volume has been guided with great patience and vision by Lara Speicher of UCL Press and her colleagues and I am grate- ful for their faith in the project. Public archaeology is founded upon the belief in breaking down divisions between professionals or academics and the wider world: UCL Press’ commitment to Open Access publishing is a beacon in this broader campaign to share knowledge freely beyond the pay-walls and prohibitive prices of traditional elite academic pub- lishing. Finally, my thanks to Maria Phelan and my family who have endured my moaning about this book for too long. Funding for this publication was provided by Jisc as part of the ‘Institution as e-textbook publisher project’. ix Contents List of figures and tables xi Notes on contributors xiii 1. Introduction: public archaeology as practice and scholarship where archaeology meets the world Gabriel Moshenska 1 2. Community archaeology Suzie Thomas 14 3. Economics in public archaeology Paul Burtenshaw 31 4. Archaeology and education Don Henson 43 5. Digital media in public archaeology Chiara Bonacchi 60 6. Presenting archaeological sites to the public Reuben Grima 73 7. The archaeological profession and human rights Samuel Hardy 93 8. The Treasure Act and Portable Antiquities Scheme in England and Wales Roger Bland, Michael Lewis, Daniel Pett, Ian Richardson, Katherine Robbins and Rob Webley 107 9. Alternative archaeologies Gabriel Moshenska 122 x CO N T E N T S 10. Commercial archaeology in the UK: public interest, benefit and engagement Hilary Orange, Dominic Perring 138 11. Archaeologists in popular culture Gabriel Moshenska 151 12. Archaeology and nationalism Ulrike Sommer 166 13. The market for ancient art David W.J. Gill 187 References 201 Index 229 xi List of figures and tables Figures 1.1 Some common types of public archaeology 6 2.1 Children from New Zion Temple church in Freedmen’s Town, Houston, learning to screen artefacts with university field-school students 18 2.2 Revealing the new information panel of a dry stone wall in Pispala, 2013 21 2.3 ‘Fishtank’ archaeology at Camden YAC Branch, London 23 2.4 2011–12 Community Archaeology Training Placement beneficiary Hannah Baxter (standing, in hat) with participants at Heeley City Farm, Sheffield 27 2.5 Participants Martin and Liam recording a Rainford building in July 2013 29 6.1 Footpath leading to Grotta del Genovese, Levanzo, Egadi Islands 78 6.2 Villa del Tellaro, south-east Sicily 80 6.3 Valadier’s early nineteenth-century restoration of the Colosseum in Rome 84 6.4 A young visitor being introduced to archery in the courtyard of Bolton Castle, Yorkshire 88 8.1 Finds reported as Treasure Trove (1988–97) and Treasure (since 1997) 110 8.2 Numbers of finds recorded on http://finds.org.uk 115 10.1 Visitors to an open day being shown the post-built Saxon building 143 10.2 The capstone in position hovering over uprights on Midsummer Day 2014 147 12.1 Consecutive migrations into Europe from the East, according to J. Grimm (1846) 169 xii L I S T O F F I G U R E S A N D TA B L E S 12.2 The seven Hungarian Chieftains, Millenium Monument, by Albert Schickedanz and György Zala 1898–1927, H ő sök tere (Place of Heroes), Budapest 172 12.3 Possible reconstructions of the Obermeilen pile dwellings, based on ethnographic analogies (Keller 1854) 176 12.4 Kossinna, Weichselland (1919). The publication claims that the Vistula area (Polish since the Versailles treaty of 1919) is ‘age-old Germanic homesoil’. The illustration shows Bronze Age settlers working the fields and migrating further east 180 12.5 Vichy 1 franc coin, 1944. The obverse bears the motto of the Petain-regime, ‘work, family, fatherland’; the reverse shows the double axe of the Gaulish king Vercingetorix between two wheatsheaves 185 Tables 4.1 Archaeological correlations with Gardner’s multiple intelligences 48 4.2 Archaeological knowledge of the past 53 4.3 Archaeological knowledge related to the present 54 4.4 Archaeological enquiry skills 56 5.1 Types of research strategy 71 12.1 Typical pattern of origin myths, with the Romans, Mexica, Hebrews and Lombards as examples 167 xiii Notes on contributors Roger Bland was formerly Keeper of the Departments of Prehistory and Europe and Portable Antiquities and Treasure at the British Museum. Chiara Bonacchi is Co-Investigator Researcher at the Institute of Archaeology, UCL. Her research and teaching are in the areas of public archaeology and digital heritage. She has worked on projects in the UK, Europe, the Middle East and America, and is Coordinator of the UCL Archaeology, Media and Communication Research Network. Paul Burtenshaw received his PhD from the Institute of Archaeology, UCL. He has carried out economic impact and value assessments in Scotland and Jordan, and was a Research Fellow at the Council of British Research in the Levant, Amman, Jordan. He is now Director, Projects at the Sustainable Preservation Initiative. David Gill is Professor of Archaeological Heritage and Director of Heritage Futures at the University of Suffolk. Reuben Grima is a senior lecturer in the Department of Conservation and Built Heritage at the University of Malta, where he lectures in cultural her- itage management. Samuel Hardy is Adjunct Professor at the American University of Rome (AUR) and Honorary Research Associate at the UCL Institute of Archaeology. He focuses on the trafficking of antiquities from Cyprus and Syria, the his- tory of conflict antiquities trafficking around the world, and open-source analysis of illicit trade. Don Henson is an archaeologist who originally specialised in the study of prehistoric flint tools but eventually saw the light and moved into public archaeology and heritage education. He is now researching the narratives we create about prehistory, and realises the past is too important to be left to archaeologists. Michael Lewis is Head of Portable Antiquities and Treasure at the British Museum and has worked as part of the Portable Antiquities Scheme since xiv N OT E S O N CO N T R I B U TO R S 2000, first as Finds Liaison Officer for Kent. He is a Fellow of the Society of Antiquaries of London and a Member of the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists. Gabriel Moshenska is Senior Lecturer in Public Archaeology at UCL Institute of Archaeology, where he researches and teaches across a range of topics including the history of archaeology, the public understanding of the past, and the archaeology and heritage of modern conflict. Daniel Pett is Senior Digital Humanities Manager at the British Museum, responsible for the Museum’s digital activity in the research arena. He was the architect of the Portable Antiquities database for twelve years, a system which has been the foundation upon which the Portable Antiquities Scheme is built. Ian Richardson is the Treasure Registrar in the department of Learning and National Partnerships at the British Museum. He heads a team which administers finds reported under the Treasure Act, facilitating their acqui- sition by public collections. He is an Associate of the Museums Association. Katherine Robbins held a Leverhulme-funded post-doctoral fellowship at the British Museum working with the Portable Antiquities Scheme. Suzie Thomas is University Lecturer in Museum Studies at the University of Helsinki, Finland. She has a PhD in Heritage Studies from Newcastle University (UK) and has previously worked as Community Archaeology Support Officer for the Council for British Archaeology. She is co- editor of the Journal of Community Archaeology and Heritage Rob Webley is a part-time doctoral student in Archaeology at the University of York. His thesis considers non-ferrous metalwork in the period around the Norman Conquest to examine changes and continuities, and their causes and effects. He is also a part-time Project Officer at the British Museum training Portable Antiquities Scheme volunteers. Hilary Orange is a post-doctoral researcher at Ruhr-Universität Bochum studying post-industrial heritage. Her research interests include the archae- ology of the contemporary world, industrial and post-industrial archaeol- ogy, heritage studies, and studies of landscape and memory. Dominic Perring is Director of the Centre for Applied Archaeology at UCL Institute of Archaeology and of Archaeology South East. Ulrike Sommer is Senior Lecturer in Prehistoric Archaeology at UCL Institute of Archaeology. Her research interests include the European Neolithic and the history of archaeology. newgenprepdf 1 1 Introduction: public archaeology as practice and scholarship where archaeology meets the world Gabriel Moshenska Public archaeology is all the New Territories, lying around the periphery of direct research into the remains of material culture ... All of them are about the problems which arise when archaeol- ogy moves into the real world of economic conflicts and political struggle. In other words, they are about ethics. (Ascherson 2000: 2) any area of archaeological activity that interacted or had the potential to interact with the public – the vast majority of whom, for a variety of reasons, know little about archaeology as an aca- demic subject. (Schadla-Hall 1999: 147) it studies the processes and outcomes whereby the discipline of archaeology becomes part of a wider public culture, where con- testation and dissonance are inevitable. In being about ethics and identity, therefore, public archaeology is inevitably about negotia- tion and conflict over meaning. (Merriman 2004: 5) K E Y CO N C E P T S I N P U B L I C A R C H A E O LO G Y 2 public archaeology in the broadest sense is that part of the discipline concerned with studying and critiquing the processes of production and consumption of archaeological commodities. (Moshenska 2009a: 47) a subject that examines the relationship between archaeol- ogy and the public, and then seeks to improve it (Matsuda and Okamura 2011: 4) The aim of this book is to give the reader an overview of study and prac- tice in the field of public archaeology. It offers a series of snapshots of important ideas and areas of work brought together as an introduction, albeit an inevitably brief and incomplete one, to one of the most chal- lenging and rewarding parts of the wider archaeological discipline. Read the book from cover to cover and you will have a good working understanding of public archaeology as a complicated, rich and diverse field, as well as knowledge of some of the most significant and iconic examples of public archaeology in action. Dip into a specific chapter and you will find a concise and insightful introduction to one aspect of pub- lic archaeology with case studies and a list of readings to develop your understanding. However you use this book I am confident that you will emerge with a better understanding of what public archaeology is, why it matters and what you can do about it. First, it is necessary and useful, drawing on the quotes above, to ask what we mean by public archaeol- ogy, and to examine some of the different ways it has been defined. The archaeologist and television personality Sir Mortimer Wheeler, one of the first prominent public archaeologists, stated I was, and am, convinced of the moral and academic necessity of sharing scientific work to the fullest possible extent with the man in the street and in the field. (1955: 104) and that It is the duty of the archaeologist, as of the scientist, to reach and impress the public, and to mould his words in the common clay of its forthright understanding. (1956: 224) 3 I N T R O D U C T I O N Wheeler was an eloquent promoter of the ideals of public archae- ology, but he was by no means the first or the only archaeologist of his time to look beyond the material remains of the past to consider the place of archaeology in the world (Moshenska and Schadla-Hall 2011). Public archaeology has remained at the core of archaeology throughout its history and into the present, touching upon every aspect of the disci- pline worldwide. Public archaeology straddles the great divides within archaeology between professional, academic and amateur; between the local and the global; between science and humanities: in fact, the study and critique of these disciplinary divisions is a vital part of what public archaeologists do. One of the challenges of public archaeology is its all-encompassing nature: its study draws on fields as diverse as economics, international law and film studies, while its practice ranges from grassroots commu- nity activism to high-level international diplomacy. All of this makes public archaeology difficult to pin down and define. Public archaeology exists in a tangle of overlapping definitions and interpretations, many of them the result of different national, organisational and educational tra- ditions: public archaeologists from Greece, Argentina, the UK and Japan will often find ourselves talking at cross-purposes, even with the best of intentions. For now, I will offer a working definition for this chapter at least, as given in the title: ‘practice and scholarship where archaeology meets the world’. This book is for people who want to better understand this point of contact between archaeology and the wider world, and for those who want to work at that interface. Within this definition of public archae- ology, we can include a multitude of things: local communities cam- paigning to protect local heritage sites, archaeologists and producers collaborating to create television documentaries, metal detector users bringing their finds for identification and recording at local museums, archaeological heritage sites researching their visitor demographics, students studying the depiction of prehistoric women in comic books, and plenty more. The aim of this chapter is not to lay out the boundaries of the field; rather, it is to give an overview of the principles of public archaeology that underlie this book and to outline the values of studying and practising public archaeology. K E Y CO N C E P T S I N P U B L I C A R C H A E O LO G Y 4 Hybridity The phrase ‘practice and scholarship’ in the brief definition above gives a hint of one of the challenges of understanding contemporary public archaeology; that is, its hybrid nature as a discipline. This hybridity and the resulting relation of public archaeology to archaeology as a whole is best understood by comparison with the sciences. The natural sciences are served by the two distinct fields of science studies and science commu- nication . Science studies is the field of research into scientific practice in its contexts, whether those be economic, social, cultural, philosophical, legal and so on. It is a notably interdisciplinary area of scholarship draw- ing on elements of sociology, history, public policy, literary criticism and other fields (Sismondo 2010). Science communication is a more practice-based field, focusing on the skills and techniques for sharing scientific knowledge and under- standing as widely as possible within fields such as education and policy- making. Trained science communicators work in journalism, museums, universities and scientific industries, and employ skills as varied as tech- nical writing and stand-up comedy (Brake and Weitkamp 2009). Public archaeology fulfils the roles of both science studies and science communication within the wider field of archaeology, bridging critical academic scholarship and professional practice. Equally, public archaeology draws upon the literature, concepts and skills developed within these fields, as well as in analogous fields such as museum stud- ies (Merriman 2004). This bringing together of scholarship and practice, and the blurred areas of overlap in between, makes public archaeology more complicated – and more interesting. Origins At this point some clarification is needed, or perhaps a confession. The model of public archaeology outlined in this introduction and in this book as a whole is neither universally agreed nor widely accepted. In fact, there are numerous narrow, overlapping and divergent definitions of the term in operation around the world, with the greatest varia- tion being the transatlantic one between the UK and US (Fagan 2003; Jameson 2004; McDavid 2004). To be completely honest, the view of public archaeology offered in this book is based on more than two decades of work at University College London’s Institute of Archaeology and the global diaspora of graduates who have emerged from what we 5 might call the ‘London school’ of public archaeology. This critical mass of scholarship, teaching and publishing was founded on the radical and iconoclastic work of Peter Ucko and driven by the teaching and writ- ing of Tim Schadla-Hall, Nick Merriman and Neal Ascherson and the work of their students starting in the late 1990s (Ascherson 2000; Grima 2002; Matsuda 2004; Schadla-Hall 2006; Ucko 1987). Over the follow- ing decades this loose network has driven many of the most important developments in public archaeology, outlined in more detail in this vol- ume, including the emerging study of digital media in public archae- ology, the engagement with cultural economics, and concerns with heritage and human rights (Bonacchi 2013; Gould and Burtenshaw 2014; Hardy 2015; Richardson 2014). It is the breadth, inclusivity and global reach of this particular model of public archaeology that make it a suitable framework for this volume. A typology Over several years of teaching and research I found that the lack of an agreed definition of public archaeology was causing problems for students, scholars and practitioners across the field. The single greatest problem for me was the difference between the inclusive definition of public archaeol- ogy given above (practice and scholarship where archaeology meets the world) and its narrower definition within the wider field of archaeology as a synonym for public outreach by professional archaeologists. In response to these challenges I developed a simple seven-part typology presented in the form of a graphic, which I first published as an illustration in an open access paper (Bonacchi and Moshenska 2015). Entitled ‘Some Common Types of Public Archaeology’, this typology offers a good overview of the different and distinct elements of the field, detailed and expanded in Figure 1.1. While I have listed them as distinct categories there is obviously a consider- able amount of overlap between them. Archaeologists working with the public This first category covers a great deal of what is generally referred to as public archaeology or, in many cases, community archaeology (Marshall 2002; Moshenska and Dhanjal 2012; Thomas 2014). It refers to archaeological work conducted by professionals which includes, by design, the provision of participation opportunities for members of I N T R O D U C T I O N